Even before it got on the ballot, Proposition 57 was the subject of rewrites, lawsuits and public angst. So it’s all the more important for voters to see Prop. 57 clearly for what it is: a measure that will encourage nonviolent offenders to use their prison time to improve themselves. Prop. 57 will also put the decision of whether to try a juvenile as an adult in the hands of a judge — not a prosecutor.

Here’s what Prop. 57 is not: It’s not a get-out-of-jail free card, as some opponents would claim.

Simply allowing a certain class of offenders — those who have served their base sentences for a nonviolent felony offense — the opportunity to be eligible for early release doesn’t mean they’re all going to earn it. These offenders still have to be screened for public safety, and then they have to go before the parole board.

The difference is that now they’ll have an incentive to be better civilians. Under the current system, offenders have little motivation to participate in rehabilitative programs. Instead, they’re encouraged to sit in prison — a difficult, dangerous environment — and wait until their sentence is finished. When they’re released, they’re often more dangerous than they were when they went in.

Prop. 57 requires California’s Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to implement a new system of credits for inmates based on their successful participation in evidence-based rehabilitation programs like education and drug treatment. The state prison system awards the sentencing credits, and then the parole board makes the final decision about whether an offender is worthy of release.

“This does nothing to change sentencing,” said Mark Bonini, chief probation officer for Amador County. “Nothing changes on the sentencing side. The people we’re talking about are going to be released to (parole) supervision, and this gives us a better chance of rehabilitation.”

Gov. Jerry Brown, who sponsored Prop. 57, was even more blunt.

“This is public safety, it’s compliant with the Supreme Court, and the opponents have no alternatives,” said Brown in a meeting with The Chronicle editorial board. “We can’t get out from under the court order unless we have a durable remedy (to reduce the state prison population). And we have evidence-based rehabilitation programs that work.”

Prop. 57 would also take some power from prosecutors — namely the power to decide whether to charge juveniles as adults — and put it in the hands of judges. We would argue this crucial decision should have remained with judges in the first place.

November ballot

Prop. 57 has strong opponents. As Brown said, crime “is a very, very emotional issue.” But policies advertised as “tough on crime” have only resulted in a state prison system that’s bursting at the seams. It’s time for sensible reform: Yes on 57.